By Jacob Seliga
Lead Writer
The first two rounds of the inaugural 12 team edition of the college football playoff have wrapped up and we now know the final four teams remaining in contention to win the national championship.
The semifinal matchups will see Ohio State face off against Texas in the Cotton Bowl and Notre Dame face off against Penn State in the Orange Bowl.
The first two rounds have brought plenty of questions and discussion topics into the air.
But what have we learned from the first two rounds as we enter the home stretch of the college football season?
And what can be improved upon as everyone goes to the table this offseason to discuss the next iteration of the playoff that’ll begin in 2026.
Rest ≠ Success
For the first nine years of the college football playoff, all four teams who made it into the bracket typically had the same amount of rest, with an occasional team having an extra week before their semifinal matchup on New Year’s Eve/Day.
This year with the expanded playoff, the four highest ranked conference champions each received a bye while the remaining eight teams faced off in a win-or-go-home matchup just 10 days prior to the quarterfinals.
The result?
All four conference champions were eliminated in the quarterfinal round. With the exception of Arizona State-Texas, none of the other three games were particularly close.
Georgia was down 17 and was bullied the entire game by the front lines of Notre Dame, which defeated Indiana in round one.
Boise State and Heisman runner up Ashton Jeanty were shut down outside of garbage time, as Penn State outclassed the Broncos for four quarters, continuing its success following its victory over SMU a week prior.
Oregon entered the Rose Bowl undefeated and looked the exact opposite against Ohio State, as the Buckeyes jumped on the neck of the Ducks building a 34-point first-half lead. No other team looked as dominant as the Buckeyes.
For all the debate that raged on social media as to who should and shouldn’t receive a bye, it appears as if it was a blessing to have not gotten one as the four semifinalists are clicking on all cylinders currently.
The committee got the right 12 teams
From the moment it appeared likely that Boise State and Arizona State were going to receive a bye and teams such as Indiana, SMU and Clemson were going to be in the bracket, social media -- and in particular SEC fans -- were very animated in their disdain for the selection process.
In the minds of Alabama, South Carolina, Ole Miss and Miami fans, as well as the remainder of SEC teams, none of those programs were worthy of getting an opportunity to compete for a national championship while they didn’t.
And they may have had a point.
After all, out of the five teams that received the most backlash for being in the bracket, none of them won a game.
But they played elite competition, and were more competitive in their playoff games than Oregon or Tennessee for example with the exception of SMU.
Arizona State was a missed call away from defeating Texas and was coming off the heels of thoroughly dominating Iowa State in the conference championship. Iowa State wasn’t at full strength beat Miami in its bowl matchup.
Boise State put up more of a fight than Illinois did when it played Penn State. Illinois defeated South Carolina in its bowl game.
Indiana was riddled with injuries and was out of gas by the fourth quarter against Notre Dame. But the Hoosiers showed their dominance when they defeated Michigan a few weeks prior. That same Michigan team beat a full-strength Alabama in its bowl game.
The SEC wasn’t the king of college football this year, and that's OK.
The SEC cannibalized itself outside of Georgia, Texas and Tennessee, which all made the playoff. But outside of those three, no team was truly worthy.
Not an Alabama team who had three losses, including a blowout to a 6-7 Oklahoma team.
Not Ole Miss which suffered two losses to a 4-8 Kentucky team and a below average Florida team.
Not South Carolina which lost to the only three teams on its schedule that showed a pulse this season.
Conference Championships have lost value
At media day prior to the Fiesta Bowl, one of the many recommendations that James Franklin had made for how he wants college football to change was that he’d like to see conference championship games be eliminated.
For many, you may be asking yourself, “Why?”
Five conference champions made the playoff, none of them won a game and their average margin of defeat was 14.4 points per game.
I’m going to present two paths to the national championship, and think about which one is more ideal.
Path A: Quarterfinal vs Ohio State, Semifinal vs Texas (in Dallas)
Path B: Round one vs SMU, Quarterfinal vs Boise State, Semifinal vs Notre Dame
Penn State, by losing to Oregon in the Big Ten Championship, slid from the 5-seed entering the final weekend of the season to the 6-seed and a path in which it faced the teams with a roster talent ranking of No. 25 and No. 76 before the semifinal.
Let’s present another example.
Path A: Quarterfinal vs Notre Dame
Path B: Round one vs Clemson, Quarterfinal vs Arizona State, Semifinal vs Ohio State (in Dallas)
Texas entered conference championship week locked into the 2-seed before slipping up against Georgia.
And as we addressed already with the bye not being a benefit, the Bulldogs' reward was a red hot Notre Dame team which had already dominated Indiana a week-and-a-half prior.
Texas, meanwhile, faced a Clemson team that was gassed after facing SMU in the conference championship, and an Arizona State team which it matched up well against. Now the Longhorns have to face a great Ohio State team but with home field advantage playing at the Cotton Bowl.
With the reward of winning a conference championship becoming less and less valuable, the debate as to whether or not it’s worth it to win one will rage on.
Ole Miss head coach Lane Kiffin has mentioned that a conference championship has lost its value. James Franklin believes it should be done away with. More and more coaches have begun to discuss the pros and cons of playing in it.
The way the committee ranked teams also didn't help.
The final playoff rankings were as followed (bold = auto bid)
Oregon
Georgia
Texas (5-seed)
Penn State (6-seed)
Notre Dame (7-seed)
Ohio State (8-seed)
Tennessee (9-seed)
Indiana (10-seed)
Boise State (3-seed)
SMU (11-seed)
Alabama (First team out)
Arizona State (4-seed)
16. Clemson (12-seed)
If this were still the four team era, there’s no way the committee would’ve ranked the teams in this order. And they did not penalize teams as severely as they’ve done in the past for losing their conference championship.
That’s a genuine problem if going to a conference championship doesn’t have value if you win, but helps if you lose. And it hurts teams on the bubble as well that need a win or a loss from a specific team to slide into the bracket.
It also shows the chaos of the ranking system that a team like Arizona State finished behind a two-loss non-conference champion in SMU and Clemson, which beat the Mustangs.
The 12-team format was a success, to a certain extent. But changes still need to be made. No solution is perfect, but there are steps that can be taken to get close to that.
Comments